I think the whole thing with HD clinging to the ‘online challenge’ and several different stories as to what happened, are more to do with deflecting the blame and protecting herself, not just from blame and judgement of ppl, but against possible criminal charges being brought.
If Archie was left alone when he was clearly vulnerable then it could be deemed against the law, and all these differing series of events could be because she left him alone, if she did, who knows how long for?
Taken from the NSPCC website,
https://www.nspcc.org.uk/keeping-children-safe/in-the-home/home-alone/
‘There's no legal age a child can be left home alone, but
it's against the law to leave a child alone if it puts them at risk’
She’s managed to avoid taking responsibility for any of this, by seemingly refusing to accept that he was depressed and at risk of harming himself. I don’t recall her admitting he had possibly been trying the same thing the day before. And I really do wonder what the poor kid tried to do to his rabbit.
She’s been able to firstly, blame a fictitious online challenge, although it blatantly it’s obvious to anyone with a brain that it wasn't recorded so it wasn’t a challenge, and there doesn’t seem to anyone else who took part this challenge or I’m sure we would’ve heard/seen proof of this by now. Secondly, it’s the hospital who’ve failed him and then murdered/executed the poor lad. Then the long drawn out wait for a massive funeral with a smattering of interviews highlighting online abuse and new laws to protect (?) kids - shame there isn’t one to protect these poor kids from their parents sometimes
I just wonder how these ppl are able/allowed to control the narrative to such an extent in these situations
Eek.. soz for essay